Love it😂

😂

4 cups of tea were spilled.

@@Swans_And_Ducks that’s sacrilege lol

Only if the British military was as mighty as it once was

That’s actually ingenious for the time

@@owenmonast9582 it really is tbh

Jesus concrete?

Kinda wish they actually made the frozen ship, there was plans to make a ship using ice to combat submarines, was on the verge of getting greenlit, then ze war ended

@@davehart1027 It’s called pykrete

Thanks dude, and thank you for your service 🇬🇧🇺🇸

@Cops are awesome I beg to differ my good sir. Yes the American war effort in the Pacific was massive, however the we held our ground in Burma and you can't deny the Indian war effort either. We wanted to join the Pacific war, but admiral king, head of the US navy command, had a severe case of Anglo-phobia and despised the British, and he never wanted the British in the Pacific war.

@Cops are awesome how was it tiny when they were also fighting the Japanese in Burma and India

Why thank you kind sir! We also sailed to save the thankless Soviets, who got their just come-uppance in 1991

@@darthreven4901 that doesn't count as the Pacific. That's Indian Ocean and south east Asian. Normal the Pacific is just counted as the tiny islands like Guadcanal and Iwo Jima

Many will appreciate your kind words, but can I say that it was the British, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders and the rest of the Empirical forces that were the only contributors in WW2 for the first 2+ years. So actually it is us that should be thanking our American cousins for lending a hand to finish the job. America teaches it's offspring that it won the war, as do the Russians. The British talk about the entire allied effort. The French don't like to talk about it at all as they were only half in. The Polish were in it longer than everyone, along with a few other Slav nations who were integrated into the RAF and such like. That's why it was called a world war, because there were way more allied troops in it, and way more Russian troops in it, for longer than the USA. I am not at all doing down the USA's huge and heroic role in defeating the Nazis and Empirial Japan, but let's face it, Uncle Sam arrived late, and could not have done it all alone either. At least not in the time it took. But I'll give you this, if you had not have joined the party, we'd be living in a different world today. God bless ya boys.

I am a Canadian who has grown up loving history, the Canadian soldiers stories frequently scare me. Canadian soldiers had one of the most difficult beaches because they of what it was afterwards, brutal close quarters fighting in the nearby farm land among the hedges and in the city they were tasked with destroying. Just a neat little fact

maybe so, but it was the Russians who won the war .....and sacrificed the most to do it......

@@johntucker2826 I disagree Sir, it is my opinion that it was an allied victory. No single member of the allies was able, alone, to deliver victory.

@@johntucker2826 “the war was won with British brains, American brawn, and Russian blood” -Stalin himself.

According to Hollywood, Britain didn't take part in WW2 at all....

Especially by American movie producers. 8-(

They mock our effort, just to satisfy their bruised ego (pride)

@@cornwallforever5305 It's a 'new money' thing.

Among the British forces were Australian cruisers and destroyers. It was a Commonwealth thing.

This is very Historically accurate.

I mean, unless its a battlecruiser unfortunately

@@Chaos_Legend The problem with battlecruisers is how they were used. Presumably, you are referring to the HMS Hood, which was sunk by the Bismarck, because battlecruisers are not designed to fight battleships. The whole idea of a battlecruiser is to outrun anything that’s a threat and blow up everything else. Sending a BC against a battleship is near suicide.

@@subparusername9172 I know that, and nope, I was talking about the battle of jutland, but good example, and the battlecruisers main role was to hunt and destroy enemy cruisers

Unlike the USN, they only spam the seas with their ships, right?

🇬🇧🇺🇸

@David Jones My father was the same way. He was awarded 2 purple hearts and a bronze star and never spoken to me about it.

Always mate 😉 🇬🇧🤝🇺🇲

Always buddy 🇬🇧 🇺🇸 🇨🇦 🇦🇺 🇳🇿

*clears throat after sipping some tea* hoorah mate.. on behalf of the old boys

XD

It's Britannia rule the waves!

@@arnolfini1434 Sorry, can't hear you over the sound of all the waves we rule over.

Japan really hit them hard not the way around

Also Britain created the ijn

You understand that speech works like “this” not ,,this” 🤣

@@spectreblitz9312 yeah i know but my phone automatically does this because in germany it is written „“

U.K.: oh no, *explosion does nothing* anyway :v

UK : **LAUGHS IN BRITISH 🇬🇧**

this comment will go viral

Pearl Harbor kind of takes the spotlight

I think of eminem.

That’s because there wasn’t very much, if at all any kamikaze action against them. The British involvement the in the pacific was losing Singapore and losing the cruisers sunk by Japan….

tbh

@@seanosborn3272 lol wrong

That seems to be the view held by many, in the U.S. even Brit's, etc! I think the feeling of shame, over the surrender of Singapore, the biggest capitulation in British history, had something to do with it being "forgotten"??

People also forget it was Australian soldiers were the first to stop the Japanese armies advance by forcing them to retreat and winning the battle of Kokoda in New Guinea in 1942.

Not helped by inaccurate Hollywood movies eg U-571 and Objective Burma,

Not to mention the Philipinos, and.indians, and chinese. They all bore much of the brunt of the Japanese army forces. LOT of fighting in the Phillipines, china, etc.

My Grandfather, Robert "Robby" MacArthur was a driver in the British Army. He was evacuated from Dunkirk and then spent the rest of the war in India and Burma. He took over the family bakery after the war. Sounds like he was very similar man to your grandfather. Quiet, wise and massive heart.

Salko Harer: Look up Jeremy Clarkson's The Greatest Raid. You are correct; the actual combatants tell their story and see what type of people they are; same as the Band of Brothers survivors..

@@MoA-Reload... my dad was a driver in the RASC. Evacuated from Dunkirk, went back in 1944, took part in the Berlin airlift. He rarely spoke about the war, took up gardening and lived his life out in peace. Brave men are ordinary men.

My father served on HMS victorious from 1939 when he volunteered and had a box full of campaign medals which when I was a child I always wanted him to wear on remembrance Sunday at the local cenotaph but he wouldn't, I still have the medals, he hated the Japanese and wouldn't eat Asian food because of the atrocities he had seen.

Bit like famous commando, went back to civvy street to sell carpets.

yeah. The Kamikaze doctrine was not very effective in the grand scheme of things. If one could trade off a plane for a ship it would be OK, but that is not what happened. The US Air craft carriers were surrounded by destroyers, frigates, and other picket ships and they shot down most of the attacking planes. The ship radars were getting very good by the end of the war and the allied ships were very prepared for the kamikaze onslaught well in advance. In addition, Allied Planes shot down more of the kamikaze planes. The combat damage of the Kamikaze attacks was just not very effective. It would have required literally thousands of more planes to be effective.. The loss of pilots, alone could not be sustained

Apparently Japanese university students were eager to volunteer, but they only allowed arts students to do so, as they were considered expendable. True story.

@@gkprivate433 standard non kamikaze attacks had even higher losses per ship sunk

Inconveniencing by interrupting afternoon tea as well. 😊😎

@@stevehendon4076 I am sure the tea went on uninterrupted. They were proper chaps in those days. That said, the bromide in Naafi tea makes it almost undrinkable.

@Mathias Ljündberg Its a picture that has to be seen to be believed thats for sure.

Well a Stuka in the Pacific would have meant the Nazis invented teleportation... so yeah... pretty scary

@@timnor4803 Obviously he was talking about earlier on in the war before he sailed to the Pacific.

@@timnor4803 I think he was talking about when they were near the German coast or maybe there own before the Brits went to the pacific. A Flight of Stukas would be Bad news for any ship, they were very good dive bombers.

@@michaelwellman2079 that's why the kamikazes were so ineffective. The British carriers were built with being hit by stukas in mind.

Remember: youre watching 10minutes of misinformation

Lemme guess.....you're American, right??

@@kokoeteantigha389 is that even an argument?

@@CharlesNauck The British ships had armoured decks not due to Kamikaze's but by coincidence from being designed for use in Eurupe They where designed with the expectation that small enemy combatants might stumble into gun range during poor visibility in the North Sea and during Atlantic storms when they might not be able to launch many planes due to sea conditions The "Armour" wasn't all of it though This issue was the "Strength deck" The American carriers had a main strengthened deck under the hanger - the British had a lesser strength deck there and there primary strength deck as the top deck This reduced the head room inside the hangar not because of how thick the deck was really but the need to lower the top deck to maintain the stability of the ship, reducing the max size of aircraft and therefore range, bit the twined strength decks acted to avoid strain on the ship in a similar fashion to how Girders, spread their loads in other structures. This meant that the British where designed for survivability in extreme sea conditions but sacrificed aircraft range, numbers and sortie generation rates The Americans had larger hangars, resulting in better work ergonomics in maintaining and readying planes for launch The difference is doctrine - The US favoured massed long range strikes by the aircraft alone - treating the planes in similar manner to a separate air-force making volume strikes The British however thought of their carriers as an integral part of the fleet - Using far more sustained recon for surface assets and air patrols cycling aircraft to harrass enemy ships engaging the fleet, forcing evasions that would throw of their ability to maintain reliable fire control solutions. The way they used fighters also differed - The Americans preferring to range further out from the fleet to ambush large incoming formations but would be stuck dogfighting the strike craft's escorts, while the British used their's to break up aircraft on the final strike runs, making it so the defensive gunners on their ships could focus on 1 or 2 aircraft that directly threatened them at a time over a longer engagement with a higher friendly aircraft attrition rate but the American idea would result in less losses for the air wings over all planes but a more effective final attack on the ships Hopefully you can see from that description of the fighters especially why the Japanese seemed so much less threatening to the British ships anecdotally There is a naval historian I find quite fun to watch called Dr Alexander Clarke who has previously described the difference between the way they are used similar to this The Americans made strategic Fleet carriers, where the British made tactical battle carriers - neither is better or worse, as long as you see the differences between their use

@@CharlesNauck I see this video as giving the Royal Navy the acknowledgment and credit that is due to them when fighting in the pacific , the video shows you how the British contributed quite a lot in the pacific and is a change from the usual , That being that the Royal Navy are over looked and only the USA and Japan are focused on when talking about the war in the pacific, also it’s not a video based on the US navy so why would they have to go into detail about which are better trained and if they got damaged more

The Malta-class aircraft carrier was a British large aircraft carrier design of World War II. Four ships were ordered in 1943 for the Royal Navy, but changing tactical concepts, based on American experience in the Pacific War, caused repeated changes to the design, which was not completed before the end of the war. All four ships were cancelled in 1945 before they were laid down.

Kamikaze pilot - I am a failure at everything and the only way to gain honor is to die for my emperor. Kinda like a terrorist in a bomb vest. Reoccurring theme.

How about a banzai charge?

this comment will go viral

Guns go *pew pew pew*

Facts lol

Every ship was armoured so yeah

What strikes me is the high number of British planes that were shot down in defense of their own carrier. I assume those British pilots kept chasing the Kamikaze planes, even as they were going through the British ships' own anti air fire, meaning that quite a few of those British planes must have been shot down by friendly fire. If that's true, those pilots were extremely brave and willing to sacrifice themselves to save their carrier. The Japanese still had a few veteran and ace pilots up their sleeve but never enough to protect all the Kamikazes.

When dealing with people of average IQ, and that would be KZfaqrs, the rule, from radio, is to say something three times, and at least once it will be understood. Congratulations, KZfaq viewer, you passed the test.

@@spectreblitz9312 the American carries had unarmored flight decks

@@HGShurtugal Both the American and Japanese carriers were unarmoured. Which is why the Battle of Midway was so devastating to the Japanese Navy. And which is also why it didn't matter if the Japanese carriers' decks were full of planes or not. Bombs went straight through the unarmoured flight decks then they exploded down below in the hangars and storage areas.

That and we're far away...

Not every time.

Mainly the aircraft carrers with armoured decks.

Lol

Yeah an unlike a town mayor or leader or whatever if there were any potholes or the sort they'd actually be filled

*kamimikazi plane hits the carrier* "Hey, did we just get hit?" "Yes...that is a very small dent" I feel like this converasation happened at least once in the war against japan

the way he pronounces Indefatigable in the video is awful.

Invicnible was sunk

A lot of Royal Navy ships had cool names.

@@Luke-tm5oy it took me a min to translate what he was trying to say.

@@dagreetpapirusmusic9163 you mean Ark Royal?

In a way they did as the Kamikaze Pilots invoked the spirits of warriors past before going into battle.

kamikaze attacks resulted with less pilots lost compared to results achived for Japan

@@hphp31416 because they were only used at the very end of the war

The stupidity of the Japanese policy was that their beat pilots ended up at the bottom of the sea, whereas the allied pilots were moved ashore after so many sorties so they could use their knowledge they had gained to train all the new pilots coming through.

Those who came back where the ones who were least deadly. Seriously, some did not manage to find ships. They did not have radar, and little training, so a little clouds or fog could seperate them from the rest, and if they got lost over open ocean, they sometimes managed to find land and even an airstrip before their fuel ran out.

The feeling is mutual

We love you lot over there 🇬🇧🇺🇸

Thanks!

we'll , we're practically family

Amerikan navy need Britisch technology and training

@@thundinarora7131 dude can you spell American right for once?

@@superiornicholas412 sorry in my native tongue we pronounce it with a strong k I carry that on in riting

@@superiornicholas412 not everyone is from the freedom/obese land dude

@Cops are awesome but not in WW2!

Pretty much sums up the difference between the two. America try to hit them before they hit you. Focusing on big short term wins as opposed to longevity (as they so often needed repairs). British planned for everything. Took a cautious approach, no point packing a punch if you can only use it once or twice a year. The caution (evidently in this video) paid off as the Japanese struggled to take them on. Nothing like a bit of British engineering!

@@Jannetts_ Gotta give some credit to American tho. Battle of midway was a slap

Yeah and British carrier has armored flight deck while US carrier doesn't.

British carriers were tougher because of German dive bombers....

@@worldscar6422 would've been a disaster if they didn't know though

Made me grimace each time he said HMS Indefatigable

Glad I found your comment before I posted something similar 😊😎

Also it's not "the Indefatigable", it's "Indefatigable" or "HMS Indefatigable".

@@naajohnnorthcott8267 nah. It's the indyfagabubble of The British Pacific Fleet. Y'know, the guy's with the blobby hands.

@@littlefluffybushbaby7256 no. She was still part of his majesty's Royal navy, and still had RN sailors on board. As such, she still would have been given the prefix "HMS". Edit: would have been his majesty at the time. Edited to reflect that.

Welllll the thing is they wanted you to turn around if there were problems like, bad weather, can't find target, plane issues, etc. But they would go back out eventually

Another instructor: you land right in there *points at the ship*

lol

@Juan Carrero I was looking for this comment.

Indeed

Yarnhub, Armchair historian, Simple history, The Front: b r u h

You are so, so, misinformed

Ofc

They're kinda inaccurate with the animations tho

I never knew that either. No dis-respect to the American fleet. They relayed on the British and commonwealth navy's so much. You don't hear much about the allies just the Americans in the pacific war. It a shame really because people believe the Americans won alone, when they obviously didn't.

They had defeated all the axis navies but Japan solo and so just moved on to japan. And while holiday lets by that point most of the Japanese fleet it already been sunk. The British ships did an amazing job at soaking up damage. Imagine if all the kamikaze is that hit the British ships were sent to US carriers or something like that. They'd have no working capital ships left. HMS Indefatigable alone survived more direct hits than any other ship, which happens to be more than the entire Japanese fleet at midway.

@Cops are awesome that is not what I said at all. I said the Japanese navy had mostly been sunk by the time the British got there in any meaningful numbers, in other words the US sunk it.

@@jacobkingsford5209 More or less. The bulk of the Japanese navy was destroyed at Leyte Gulf, while Yamato would be sunk in its own kamikaze attack by American carriers. The British did sink some warships, however. The Japanese cruiser Haguro was sunk in a night action by some British destroyers. Amusingly, even if Haguro had survived the British destroyers, it would've had to face the French battleship Richelieu which was on the hunt nearby. Another cruiser was sunk by a British submarine, while yet another was sunk by British commandos. A light carrier was also sunk by British carrier aircraft. To be sure, by that point, the naval war had already been won. The Japanese fleet of 1945, crippled by lack of fuel and spectacularly outnumbered, had become useless. Just wanted to throw that out there.

@@Cailus3542 oh yeah. I'm not saying Britain did nothing against Japan at all. I was just saying that Britain did not do as much at sinking the Japanese fleet as America did. Has Britain had instead thank the Italian and German fleets (and a lot of the French)

@@jacobkingsford5209 Lets not forget, the biggest loss to the Japanese Army was at the Burma/India border, which was fierce and costly to both sides. Sure, the British didn't have the resources we had, but they did come and fight.

Hips Brrrrrrrritissssssssssssssh pfffffffaaaaaaaaaaasiffffffficc pfleeeet hips.

*Dies to alchol poisoning

Beer when he says BPF, shot everytime he says armoured carriers, every time u hear kamikaze u need to spin in a circle lol.

Or the word Armoured lol

Frank we dont want to die lol just push it to the limit lol

Screams in type 45

*Laughs in American*

No. The British didn't use B29s.

@@fredsmith5473 actually we did

Psst! HMS Hood,cough cough.

🍁 looks better

Copeland

@Cops are awesome lol that you think you know anything

@Cops are awesome I know you can't read.

@Cops are awesome Aw bless. You think you are a man.

But this trick cost us the lives of a whole battlecruisers crew to learn when the Bismarck hit HMS Hood.

idk

It's royal navy anyway 😂

30 is what I counted lol

30 lol

Right

Up until the US became involved in WW2 the British Navy was the largest in the world!

its really easy to recreate what he said, simply say indefatigable whilst you have your tongue out

Oh, come on! It's just a snooty way of saying 'Tireless'. English, tsk.

Isn’t it one of those computer generated voices?

He was indyfagabubble about doing it

Why do they have illiterate, ignorant people narrate videos?!

I just did. RIP it’s like banksy was around in the 1940s

I searched it up to and that is literally no damage

I can only see an imprint of a zero

Just looked that up and nearly swallowed the can I was drinking from when I saw it. I wonder how long they left that imprint there as a visual warning to other Japanese pilotd.

69 likes 8)

Back when we funded any part of our military properly! Our current spend isn't bad but it's lacking compared to the top militaries.

Still one of the highest ranked navy’s in the world.

Well we don't have a world war now Reason :nukes go bad

Back when you had an empire to fund it.

@@dylankennedy6389 4th biggest military spending in the world ain't bad considering there's over 250 countries in the world

....and what a naval power they are now.

@@edhuber3557 do I suspect sarcasm ?

@@edhuber3557 Stop contemplating your navel

@@edhuber3557 lol they are the only army in the world that can launch nukes without head of state authority and there is a nuke vanguard class sub patrolling all major waters at all times so id say they still pack a mighty punch they have enough firepower on each sub to wipe out a continent has they use a trident nuclear system the bobs are designed to split into 32 war heads and each explode 1.5 miles from the ground. also if there subs sink an enemy at sea when they come back to dock they fly the jolly rodger.

I can just imagine some japanese soldiers watching one of our carriers getting hit by a kamikaze plane and being totally shocked that the ship was practically fine

The Malta-class aircraft carrier was a British large aircraft carrier design of World War II. Four ships were ordered in 1943 for the Royal Navy, but changing tactical concepts, based on American experience in the Pacific War, caused repeated changes to the design, which was not completed before the end of the war. All four ships were cancelled in 1945 before they were laid down.

@@nickdanger3802 While this is very interesting Information what does it actually have to do with the comment you are replying too, not that it matters, I suppose

Get the mops out and mix the concrete. Wouldn't want to trip and spill my tea.

@@edwardhilder Steady yourself

@@nickdanger3802 If only they had been completed... Maybe we would have seen CVA -01 actually happen.

They both had the same aircraft capacity once British adopted deck parking in the safer Pacific. (Excluding Midway class because that is just built different)

@@jacobkingsford5209 No, not exactly. Due to an armoured flight deck it meant that the hanger was lower, meaning that British carrier aircraft had to fold their wings backwards where as American Aircraft could fold them upward thanks to the extra height. This meant that there was more floor space available within the hanger decks of American carriers which allowed them to carry more aircraft. However the British weren’t overly concerned about this as their carriers were never mainly seen around the Mediterranean and North Atlantic,meaning that they weren’t as far from home soil as the American carriers sometimes were

@@Papanza295 many American aircraft had backwards folding wings like the F6f and F4f

IT wasn’t damage control that the USN (and IJN) were counting on in carrier design - it was the fact both navies were built for battles on the open ocean, where they’d be hard to find. The british fleet, meanwhile, was built with the intent to fight mainly in the north sea, Mediterranean, and English Channel. Where they would absolutely be found by land based aircraft and needed to be able to stay capable after being bombed. WHich is the only detail I wish the video had covered more

History clearly confirms that the USA relies very heavily on being able to run away.

Did they have excellent carrier aircraft?

@@nickdanger3802 yup, once they re equipped with US designs (saying that, the Swordfish, despite everything, did stunning service)

@@nickdanger3802 I’m British and can confirm we did not have excellent carrier aircraft during the time, merely sub par air carriers lol though nowadays with the newest iteration of the lynx we are probably now back up to excellent 😂✌🏻

@@bigglesbiggles1 Well no they used some American designed planes for a short while Nick!

I remember there was an incident like this during the Korean War as well. HMS Jamaica was assisting US forces (I think it was at Inchon) and they were brutally attacked by Communist warplanes, one of them literally exploding over the ship. Incredibly, despite being blasted by strafing and hit by explosive rounds (among other stuff), only one sailor was killed and the ship only moderately damaged, thanks to the vessel's incredible armor.

When a American say that to me, my response is, "And if it we hadn't have won the Battle of Britain, you'd be speaking German also."

The British were struggling during the early months of the war you know. In fact, the US had to give resources just for the British to survive. For that reason, the US would enter the war because Germany saw what the US was doing for the Brits.

@Cops are awesome We were actually pretty close from speaking German. During the foundation of the country (USA) it came down to a 5 to 4 vote (5 in favor of English being the official language, 4 votes for German). Imagine the alternative history path that singular vote would have led us to.

@Cops are awesome You didn’t bail us out. The UK survived the German invasion threat in 1940 and would not have been invaded after that. The US bailed out France, Belgium, Holland etc.

@Cops are awesome kindergarten, hamburger, yeah no German whatsoever 😳

Armour no, lots of kettles for brewing tea yes.

The video said it

@@_Crazyman109 like 50 times

Or maybe... just maybe it could be due to the armoured ship decks. 🧐

Idk, shouldn't that be mentioned in the video? Maybe I missed it

It annoyed me and no doubt if C.S Forrester can hear this he’d hate it to since it was the ship in the majority of the Hornblower series.

@@jonathantitterton9455 it was doing my head in, I love those books especially the indy!

Are we gonna ignore the fact that majority of this video is misinformation?

@@mirage_panzer2274 what evidence do you have for this?

@@jonathantitterton9455 me and my friend just rant and pointing out the misinformation on the video for an hour. There are just so much things from the fuel tank they call it as a bomb, to "British ships Chad US ships virgin" nonsense. There are just too much faulty if you ever watch documentaries. British Aircraft carrier is bad, there is also a reason why you never heard of spitfire fighting zero because british planes never fought zero. They are busy with kreigsmarine on europe, only US focus on Japan alone. Look up on USS Enterprise, how many times it got bomb and still functional? Armor doesnt matter because kamikaze dont attack aircraft carrier, they attack supply ships or destroyer for the least, that ship is also mounted with tons of AA.

Cheap at the price, for what it bought.

hms unicorn what a good name

Well at least he can pronounce those names. Unlike Indefatigable lol

I feel like Britain's involvement in the Korean War isn't talked about enough either. The Royal Navy even assisted our Marines at Inchon. That conflict really should be talked about more.

@@thunderbird1921 I agree. That beach invasion gets little talk. They always discuss the Chosin Reservoir battle that follows but skim over the invasion that led to it, it was a huge operation.

🇬🇧🇺🇸

I’m guessing you’re new to the channel?

Haha

This channel is not known for its accuracy.

Meh, details 😂

Whatever it was, it glinted in the sun. You know, the sun that magically bent around corners to hit the underside of the aircraft... How do we get this channel shut down?

The Americans were planning to launch the USS Diem..therf...erDie but sadly it was scrapped.That's were Quentin Tarantino got the idea for the bloke who hides out in the toilet in Pulp Fiction.Honest.

That's for sure Juan. Most taken from the Greek Myths but my favourite Is Dreadnought. 'I fear nothing.' I do tip my hat to the Japenese though. When translated they have great meaning also.

I mean sooner or later they may have the USS Donald J Trump... 😳

@@benwhitehead5806 or HMS Donald J Trump..I wish

well they sunk Japans fleet, and they nuked japan and took control of it. I'd say america did a lot more then The tea drinkers

@@phoenixrider4622 we'd have our own fair share of things done. Battle of Britain Bismarck The graf spee El Alamein (the whole north African campaign rly) The Italian Mediterranean fleet Tirpitz Dam busters A staging point for DDay A route for Russian supply lines Free French hosting Not to mention the Radar etc.

@Cops are awesome Two battleships actually. The Tirpitz was Bismark's sister ship. Also "battleship" is one word, not two. Bismark was also critically wounded by a handful of Swordfish, a torpedo plane that looks more like a WW1 relic than a contemporary warplane which is far more impressive than winning with state-of-the-art torpedo planes and dive bombers. Also Japan's navy might look tough on paper, but when you factor in how out of date some of their tech actually was...well... And their damage control was third-rate, resulting in ships sinking from what any other major fleet would consider minor damage. For example, the Yamato's final configuration, on paper, looks like pilot's bane with 152 dedicated AA weapons with most of it's other guns, including it's main 18.1 inch guns, could be loaded with anti-air rounds as well. However when it was sunk it had only shot down three of the literally hundreds of planes attacking its fleet with AA fire, with a handful of others being shot down by its screen or being knocked out by Yamato's final explosion.

@@phoenixrider4622 Only nuked Japan when they finally got the B29 to work. Was nearly done by a Lancaster, but...politics

@Cops are awesome you missed out British code breaking shortened the war by two years roughly ,also we had given you radar which you had at Pearl, your top brass chose not to believe it even when it showed the Japanese air attack coming in . Don't forget British troops in Burma and India to name but two they tied down alot of Japanese troops. In the end we all played are part

I thought it very cringe worthy how he pronounced it.

@@jonmcgee6987 I only know how to say it thanks to Drachinifel

Americans can’t pronounce such an English word lol

They put the em*pha*sis on the wrong syl*a*ble

The Britisch did not lose the war, they fought the entire axis until Russia joined

The Brits and commonwealth forces pushed the Japanese out of most of South East Asia, took control of Thailand and later defeated the communists in Vietnam and Malaya.

The war against Japan has tended to focus on the US effort (including only mentioning Pearl Harbor and ignoring all the other attacks that took place at the same time) but that's because most of the output has been American aimed at an American audience. The other allies hardly get a mention because it's not going to resonate with the target audience. Getting backing for something about Pearl Harbor will always be easier, and more profitable, than something about the Dutch or the Australian effort for instance. The Chinese probably get the most hard done by. They were in a similar place that the USSR was in terms of acknowledgement of their efforts and suffering. Since ex-soviet archives are now more accessible and the cold war is closer to room temperature the Russian efforts are more acknowledged. Going forward I think the Chinese will be. They now have their own Hollywood style movie output about WW2. The other allies will probably still have to fight for what's left of the limelight.

@@timphillips9954 Yep, and I'd give a specific tip of the hat to those British (commonwealth) forces that were not from Britain. British Indian and African forces as well as ANZACs. For instance, I think the core of British forces in Viet Nam were Indian. Post-war the Japanese troops were co-opted. Wierd how stuff happens.

Is this doom 2016 or something?

@@mrmosky2784 yeah maybe.

...it's TierZoo

Lol I guess he had a go a really bad effort tho

That makes me laugh everytime he says it. In-dee-fat-ig-a-bull

This is what happens when you drag an American into the dark depths of the English dictionary. I'd love to see him wrestle with discombobulated.

@@tonyyates2012 I cant say the first one, but I confused my first grade teacher one day saying discombobulated she sent me to the office and my grandmother took me home

@@johterrianevans3480 You should have told your Grandma and teacher that you are an anti-disestablishmentarianist.

Used to be world renowned anyway.

@@kfg452 no still is

@@ryansmith-zj7gn I can smell the tea from here...must have been the farmers dressed like natives...

@@kfg452 it's still the best navy after the US, China and Russia (depending on whether they remember their tug boats)

@@jacobkingsford5209 Still the best, the others are just larger

HMAS Sydney only commissioned in 1948.

@@dovetonsturdee7033 HMS PHAETON keel laid 8th July 1933, served throughout WW2 in the British Royal Navy.

@@dovetonsturdee7033 I’m sorry, I just fact checked myself, you are right, I had misread an article, the Aircraft Carrier Sydney was only commissioned after the War as HMS Terrible, sorry and thanks for the correction

@@anthonyburke5656 Indeed, but she was a light cruiser, transferred to the RAN before completion, and renamed Sydney. She did not survive the war. The carrier of the same name was a Majestic class light fleet carrier, launched as HMS Terrible in 1944, but not commissioned, as HMAS Sydney, until 1948.

@@anthonyburke5656 Sorry. I replied to your first post before I read the second!

i believe you're forgetting the setting time of concrete, I'd say 1/2 an hour including tea breaks 😊

*whistle sounds* *BOOOOOOM!!!!*

@@anonymo_use5918 japan:..huh....i didnt know we was fighting planetary level charactures

@@SJstackinbodys *second whistle sounds* *BOOOOOM!!!!*

@@anonymo_use5918 America: this is just 50% of my nuclear power

@@SJstackinbodys Japan:あなたが勝つ

Do not for your own sake. Its terribly misinformed, there are reasons why documentaries made hours worth of video explainning one topic than the a big chunk of the war like this. Do not trust inforgraphic shows if youre looking for historical accuracy and learning history

This is propaganda, Britain was awful in the pacific and kept losing to Japan and embarrassing themselves. Worst defeats in British history were by Japan.

@@user-pn3im5sm7k troll. Terrible attempt. Not only you got ignored but now you're called out.

@@cornwallforever5305 It's just history. You don't need to get mad at me. You can get mad at the British for being so awful I guess.

@@user-pn3im5sm7k had the Brits surrendered, Germany would have won. Quit with such a cheap narrative and learn history

Not with a Wooden flight deck.

Not from the french

The Midway Class had an armored flight deck and were under construction in 1945

@@SJstackinbodys Oh I wish I could double like your comment :) once as an Englishman and once as a Star Wars fan

@@tonybuk70 😁

They do a horrible job actually.

I think someone's jealous.

@@Mechjeb661 naw not really, just tired of seeing incorrect of just misleading information being spoonfed to people who don’t know any better, which isn’t the people’s fault for not knowing.

@@-di-johnson6706 Then why don't you say what is incorrect?

@@Mechjeb661 first off, by 1945, Britain’s assistance in the pacific was not vital (as it’s described in the video), however they were still a useful asset. And personally I feel as if the narrator describes having an armored flight deck as being the best option and carriers with wooden flight decks are inferior. He may not be doing that but that’s what it sounds like to me. Something he could’ve done to not give off the impression that carriers with armored decks are superior is giving a list of pros and cons for each design. For example, carriers with wooden flight decks are generally faster and easier to produce, cheaper, and they could also generally carry more aircraft than armored carriers. But their wooden decks were susceptible to heavy damage from kamikazes. And just reverse it for the carrier with armored decks. That’s a misleading information issue. Another thing is that the war in the pacific would most likely not have been prolonged if britain was not there to assist, because the atomic bomb was going to be used with or without Britain’s help. And as far as I know Britain did not assist in capturing Tinian island (the base from which the nuclear capable b-29s were sent). A lot of things the show says are mostly misleading and can make people who know a little bit less history get the wrong idea about it. Not as many things were factually incorrect in this video compared to others but still a couple details that were left out.

Actually the Americans valued mass production , which worked , but it came at the cost of quality - quality also worked ! Mass production gave the Americans the opportunity to produce low grade carriers fast but with significant limitations, for instance, wooden flight decks, which was cheap and dangerous in combat but allowed the craft to be fast and consume less fuel............In the entire war though, the GIANT American mass production capability DID produce more carriers than the British - but not by much!

The spitfire was also a faster and better fighter than the japanese zero's.

The Spitfire was a land-based plane flown by the RAF. The Seafire was the naval variant and it would have been flown by Royal Navy pilots. The experience of dogfighting the Nazis was not by the same guys. The Seafire was also not that common as a naval fighter because it really wasn't that suitable. It has narrow undercarriage and quite a high landing speed for carrier use. The strengthening of the undercarriage, addition of a hook etc. added to the weight of the plane reducing it's performance. It was also designed to be an interceptor and as such has a limited range, something that is a big drawback for carrier planes. Compare the range of a Spitfire or Seafire to the Zero and you'll see how large a difference there is. I watched a video about the Seafire and a veteran was saying it was still a good plane. All carrier-based planes are generally more robust, and therefore heavier, than their ground-based counterparts, and these are what it would be facing. So the Seafire not being as nibble as the Spitfire would matter less. The RN used many other planes (e.g. the Fulmar) and also used US planes like the Corsair. There was also a naval version of the Hurricane. They even tried out the Mosquito on carriers but it had a tendency to turn into matchsticks on a rough landing. Carrier planes have to be able to take a lot of abuse and are built like tanks.

@@littlefluffybushbaby7256 It was probably more the Fulmars.

Just noticed my own typo: I think the Spitfire was more nimble than nibble.

@Cops are awesome sure after just watching a video on the British accomplishments in the Pacific theatre and your American public education still shines through, without the British in ww2 it would've gone very very differently, ever heard of the enigma code used by the Germans, Japanese and then Russians after the war. You can thank the British for telling you about midway or any of the countless times we knew exactly when, what and where the enemy were going.

wow shocker, a nation with the greatest military history on the entire planet knows what they are doing with their world renowned Navy… |:

@@leodesalis5915 he is a Amerikan troll

I tried that remark on my girlfriend. Ex-girlfriend.

WoW. They did! Also slower and had to resupply in port not at sea like the USA.

@@brentmiller7714 Well, not quite. Illustrious-class carriers were capable of reaching 30 knots, only marginally slower than American carriers, and the British certainly did resupply at sea during the Pacific War.

Han is under attack! Han who? *HANCOCK*

Nice to know American humour is similar to modern humour

John Hancock was a founding father lol

Herbie Hancock - Rock it !!

@@0utcastAussie haha OK Tommy Boy

It was king at the time

@@johnsmith-iv8ul Thats how old she is, she was calling the shots before her dad ever knew.

@@mr.patriotjol well my grandmother met her in lonDon during during the Blitz driving a ambulance as my grandmother was paramedic at that time too

King / Who Was Also Admiral of British Navy*

@@johnsmith-iv8ul ah that’s wonderful

The idea was the uk had bases to go to and from and get things done: Gibraltar, Malta, Alexandria, Scapa Flow, Ceylon, Singapore and Hong Kong.